Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Rumors vs Reality: a Note on the 7470

arn

arn

macrumors god
Original poster
Staff member
Apr 9, 2001
16,416
5,882
This is just a headsup and wake-up call to the rumor mongers. I think people don't understand the difference between "rumors" and "reality".

"Rumors" are reports/stories/sources that indicate possibilities in the future. Some may come true, some may not.

"Reality" involves things that are publically released by the companies we are discussing.

Just keep this in mind... and it's something I've seen people in other forums and sites talk about.... they talk as if the 7470 chip actually exists and Apple just isn't using them.

The 7470 chip is what we call a "rumor". This chip does not officially exist. To use it to complain about "Why doesn't Apple use the damn 7470 in the PowerMacs!" is the same as complaining about why "Apple doesn't use Santa Claus to build Power Macs" or "Why doesn't Apple use the damn Easter Bunny to build PowerMacs"

Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the 7470 are all equally as "real"

arn
 
hey arn i agree with u all the way but that last line about santa, easter bunny and the 7470 being equally as "real" u are joking right.

i mean i know the 7470 and the easter bunny dont exist but man santa, santa is real:(
 
Well technically... there was a Santa Claus. But he's dead now. Sorry kiddies. He died hundreds of years ago. "And you can find more information at your local library".

Anyway, we can all kind-of assume that EVENTUALLY Moto will release a 7470 or whatever, since they have a 74** series going. Unless of course they go under, or Apple goes to IBM, or they rename the series, or call the next chip the 7456, or what ever.

But calling the 1.25 GHz an overclocked 1 GHz before they even start selling them, is jumping the gun a bit. That's like calling the new 2.8 GHz P4 an overclocked P3 (wait, bad example). Everyone seems to be forgetting that the FSBs are actually 4 x 100 and 4 x 133 (DDR 100 and 133 for AMD). 167 w/ DDR333 is actually pretty cool. Even if it is bastardized.

Don't get me wrong. Apple IS competing against the world of WinTel, and they aren't doing so well in speed or price. I, for one, like it just as much when people have legitimate complaints as when they have a legitimate complement. If we just accept the way things are, they'll never get better. Macs are easier to use, more stable, etc, etc... but they're not as fast. And "Apple is a business" is not a good excuse. It just proves my point. So stop saying, "if you don't like it go buy a PC".

Cuz they will. Duh.

If the new Dual 1.25s are as fast as a ~2 GHz x86, I'd be happy. Have you ever tried to edit video on a PC? Zero to Crash in 60 sec. If the iBook can do some basic stuff like typing letters and surfin' the net, and it's pretty affordable (and light, and sturdy, and has a long battery life), I'm happy. Benchmarks, shmenchmarks, it's real world performance that counts.

When I feel like Apple's acting like M$ (yeah, that's right, I said it), and a >$1000 PC can whip the *** of the $3000+ "Top-of-the-Line" Mac, I'm not happy.

And believe me, yer gonna hear about it.

Now where are the darn 7500 G5s we were promised (please note sarcasm).
 
Whadda you mean Santa and the Easter Bunny aren't real!!!???!!! :eek: :confused: :eek:

ok ok, I guess that explains why they always miss my house! :D

Anyway, I think moto may be working on their new chip, that is if they care. I work in electronic component sales, and yes my company is a moto distributer. I get to see what the PPC's are selling for in their raw form (public costs anyway ie. $146 US for a G4 500MHz in 44pcs lot [keeping in mind that is just the core before apple plays with it! :eek: no wonder apples cost more! Blame motorola]) and motorola is still charging to much for their processors. They are going the way of embedded procs and don't really seem to care about the PPC division. The most development is in coldfire procs. Anyway, I'm getting off track kinda. What i wanna say is that I have no doubt that motorola will finish the 7470, they will just do it on their time, which unfortunatly is slooower than a PC rendering graphics on photoshop! By the time they get it out they'll have changed it so much that Apple will have gone to [hopefully] faster and better IBM processors.
So until then we should just take what we can get and be happy we are'nt running winblowz XP :D :D
 
Originally posted by galstaph
Anyway, I think moto may be working on their new chip, that is if they care. I work in electronic component sales, and yes my company is a moto distributer. I get to see what the PPC's are selling for in their raw form (public costs anyway ie. $146 US for a G4 500MHz in 44pcs lot [keeping in mind that is just the core before apple plays with it! :eek: no wonder apples cost more! Blame motorola]) and motorola is still charging to much for their processors.
Click to expand...
While Moto's processors may cost more than Intel's and AMD's (for good reason), I highly doubt that they are the sole contributors to Macs "higher" prices. Just look at the profit margin for Macs. They are much higher than any other computer manufacturer.

And the iBook costs a little more than a comparable P3 laptop. There's an IBM chip in there, not MOT.

Blaming Motorola for Apple's high prices is like blaming Nakamichi for the high price of Lexus'. NOTE - this was the only analogy I could think of at 7:30 am... sorry.
 
Originally posted by solvs



But calling the 1.25 GHz an overclocked 1 GHz before they even start selling them, is jumping the gun a bit. That's like calling the new 2.8 GHz P4 an overclocked P3 (wait, bad example). Everyone seems to be forgetting that the FSBs are actually 4 x 100 and 4 x 133 (DDR 100 and 133 for AMD). 167 w/ DDR333 is actually pretty cool. Even if it is bastardized.

Don't get me wrong. Apple IS competing against the world of WinTel, and they aren't doing so well in speed or price. I, for one, like it just as much when people have legitimate complaints as when they have a legitimate complement. If we just accept the way things are, they'll never get better. Macs are easier to use, more stable, etc, etc... but they're not as fast. And "Apple is a business" is not a good excuse. It just proves my point. So stop saying, "if you don't like it go buy a PC".

Cuz they will. Duh.

If the new Dual 1.25s are as fast as a ~2 GHz x86, I'd be happy. Have you ever tried to edit video on a PC? Zero to Crash in 60 sec. If the iBook can do some basic stuff like typing letters and surfin' the net, and it's pretty affordable (and light, and sturdy, and has a long battery life), I'm happy. Benchmarks, shmenchmarks, it's real world performance that counts.

When I feel like Apple's acting like M$ (yeah, that's right, I said it), and a >$1000 PC can whip the *** of the $3000+ "Top-of-the-Line" Mac, I'm not happy.

And believe me, yer gonna hear about it.

Now where are the darn 7500 G5s we were promised (please note sarcasm).
Click to expand...


agreed - except essentially, it IS a 1 ghz chip thats passed its acceptance for 1.25. At least a p3 and p4 have large architectural differences!



as of late, Apple IS acting like M$ - teh DDR marketing spin is just that - "ooh !look!! a new buzzword gullible buyers!", whilst in 'real world performance' I am yet to be impressed with Jagwire on my iBook. (under 10.2, Word currently lasts an average of 20 minutes before crashing and it is also DOG SLOW handling more than a 20 page document.....grr....not good for thesis writing! this is the kind of real world performance issue I'd like to see addressed - you can keep ichat etc if your web browser crashes or takes noticeable seconds to render tables and images...)


Personally, teh current register jagwire review sums my feelings up exactly.
 
Originally posted by Pants
agreed - except essentially, it IS a 1 ghz chip thats passed its acceptance for 1.25. At least a p3 and p4 have large architectural differences!
Click to expand...
I know that you did agree with solv, but I just wanted to say this.

The 1.25ghz isn't an "overclocked" 1.0ghz chip. Yes, the 1.25 and the 1.0 aren't much different, but the 1.0 isn't much different than the 867 (or the 600). No one's calling the 1.0ghz an overclocked 600mhz G4.

Just wanted to get that off my chest.
 
So if its not overclocked what is it. Did it just get passed to run at 1.25 dont know
 
Originally posted by tliptak
So if its not overclocked what is it. Did it just get passed to run at 1.25 dont know
Click to expand...
That's right. I'm 99.999999% sure that the 1.25ghz chips that Apple will be using are fully rated to run at 1.25ghz.

It would be extremely stupid for Apple to put in chips rated up to 1ghz in there and OC them to 1.25ghz. As the yields of the 1ghz G4 continue to rise (they should be since they've been pumping them out for 8 months), they're bound to get chips that pass at higher frequencies. Plus, the manufacturing techniques have probably improved so they get more and more fast chips.

So in conclusion, the dual-1.25ghz Macs will have G4s that are rated for 1.25ghz or higher.
 
Originally posted by ftaok ... the dual-1.25ghz Macs will have G4s that are rated for 1.25ghz or higher.
Click to expand...

Right. That's what I meant.

Any released chip (that isn't a new architecture, of course) is rated as high as it's rated. If the new chip is a G4 7455, or whatever the 1 GHz is now, it'll be rated at 1.25. That doesn't mean it's an OC'ed 1 GHz. It means it's a similar chip that is rated to run higher. Just like the 867 MHz vs. 1 GHz analogy made earlier.

Of course, there have been execptions to the rule. Usually with not-so-good results. (I'm surprised I haven't been flamed more for this).

Now whether or not it can truly take advantage of the DDR... that's another subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back